Forum: Author Hangout

Reference list!?!

That's so generic, I might as well simply title it "Appendix" and be done with it. I was hoping to find a specific book term, as I'm sure I'm not the only author who's even wanted to include this type of thing in a book before.

As of now, I still think that "Bibliography" is the most apt term I've heard (since it lists the books I'm referencing in my stories).

Wikipedia has guidelines for citing within Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources

They say to put the reference in a footnote.

This is the MLA Guide's rules for citing (as described by OWL (Purdue University On-Line Workshop)). I didn't try to understand what it says.

Or you could simply have the citation following the quote, as in:

Chapter 1
"xxxxxxxx"
— William Shakespear

or

— William Shakespear, Hamlet, p. 10

Unfortunately, Switch, most authors follow your 'option A', which means their attributes are often completely wrong, or feature modified quotes or worse, 'requoted quotes' (i.e. quotes which are attributed to those who simply regurgitate what they read as youths).

When trying to 'authenticate' my quotes, many of the sources end up being fairly lengthy, especially if you have to highlight misattributions or modifications of an original quote, so you really can't add it to the tail end of a quote without providing a link to a specific webpage.

I prefer providing the original quote, along with a simple attribution, but offer the sources for anyone interested at the back of the book. Hopefully, that way, I won't continue to contribute to the 'passing off' of worthless information on the net.

I can't tell you the sheer number of 'quote books' which don't authenticate a single quote!

Also, SOL provides no mechanisms for including footnotes, other than at the end of each chapter, and no one is ever going to stop reading, to jump to the end of the chapter, and then search through the entire chapter trying to find where they were. That's simply an unworkable solution. (Sorry for venting, but we've had these 'footnote' discussions before, which never actually found any sort of consensus.)

That said, adding specific footnotes, which link to the Bibliography in my ebooks, makes sense. As it is, I'm adding a footnote "*" to any quotation which differs from what's commonly associated with a particular author, to show that the common claims are disputed.

Also, don't forget that there's a world of difference between how non-fiction and fiction works handle similar situations. Most non-fiction works routinely use end-of-chapter footnotes, so it' makes perfect sense to do the same with quotes, whereas it merely impedes the flow of a story in fiction.

* Again, story about continuing to rant, but I'm hoping for solutions, rather than mere continuances to the existing problems I'm facing.

I looked at CMOS but couldn't figure out the answer. The relevant sections I found were:

14.59 Kinds of bibliographies

15.10 Function and placement of reference lists

Thanks, Ross. That's helpful.

In my own books, I've consistently renamed my own bibliography section as "Other Books by the Author", so renaming "Reference Notes" as "Bibliography" isn't a stretch (as, presumably, my readers will expect that it's not a standard bibliography).

Following the idea which Switch's comments generated (about including footnote links to my (Epigraph) Bibliography) would, in itself, explain the role of the Bibliography (as no one else would ever likely encounter it, since it's buried in the back of the book). But I gave up on 'section explanations' after continually providing my own 'disclaimer' on my Character List sections, explain how to use a character list. In short, it never helped, it never got readers to use the section properly, and it only stated the obvious.

How about if I create an entirely new term: Epigraphography? :D

You could go with 'Citations Page'.

Now that's an Excellent suggestion! It's much more precise and instantly recognized than my vaguely misused "Bibliography" terminology.

I officially owe you one (feel free to remind me the next time we lock heads). Consider it a 'free pass' for at least one argument. 'D

I agree that 'citations' is the best word, but I'd call what you have a 'list' rather than a 'page'.

For my uses, I think I'll simply use "Citations", without specifying what it consists of. After all, I'm not titling my "Copyright" or my "Acknowledgments" pages as "Contents Page" and "Acknowledgments List". The shorter title makes it easier to manage too.

Now, I've got several books to update! 'D

Consider it a 'free pass' for at least one argument. 'D

Nah, I like to exchange viewpoints to much. I usually learn a lot by exchanging ideas, even if I don't totally agree with what the other person is saying. Although I don't argue just to argue.

Who is Much?

He's the Miller's son.

Humor is always welcome. :)

Does anyone know the correct book terminology for a list of sources.

Bibliography.

And here we are again, having successfully completed a full circle.

By the way, a "bibliography" is technically a list of an author's complete works, just like a discography is a listing of a musician's complete recordings, but I agree that it sounds like a more natural choice.

Given everything already discussed, I think I'll go with "Citations", although "Bibliography" looks much better on the printed (and non-printed) page. However, Switch's suggestion largely avoids the entire issue, because once I add in live-links to my ebooks, no one will ever have to worry about what it's called. If they're curious about a quote, they can simply click on the attribution and jump right to it without worrying about where to find it. For my print books, they still have to leaf to the end of the book, just as they do now.

But, of course, really no one CARES about this but me, so this is essentially just a hell-of-a-lot of effort with ZERO return, but it makes me feel like more of a professional, so what the hell! It ain't costing me nothing but time.

By the way, a "bibliography" is technically a list of an author's complete works,

The term is also used in academic writing to refer to a list of cited works at the end of a scholarly article/research paper.

Which is why I initially (for 3 or 4 books) used "Bibliography", but then I started having second thoughts. As I stated earlier, I prefer Bibliography, as it looks 'cleaner', cut "Citations" is probably a more precise term, since this isn't a list of resources used, but merely a list of Cited quotations. But, as I also previously mentioned, providing direct links (at least in my ebooks) save readers from worrying about what it's called, as they can jump directly to the source material.